Latest news with #AlbertaCourtofAppeal
Global News
04-07-2025
- Global News
Conviction upheld for Edmonton man who used scissors to kill 7-year-old girl
An Edmonton man has failed to overturn a murder conviction he received two years ago for stabbing a girl to death with scissors. David Moss had urged the Alberta Court of Appeal to reduce his conviction from murder to the less-severe manslaughter in the death of the seven-year-old. Moss argued the trial judge should not have convicted him of murder — which carries a life sentence — because he was mentally unwell and not in a state of mind to form the intent to commit such a crime. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy But appeal judges say when all of the evidence is taken into account, there is not enough to show the judge was wrong to draw a conclusion that Moss knew his actions could cause harm. Court heard Moss was a friend of the girl's mother and one night, just as the mother was about to kiss the girl good night, he entered her bedroom with a pair of scissors, pushed the mom aside, and slashed and cut the girl's neck repeatedly. Story continues below advertisement Moss testified that he thought he was in a game as he stabbed the girl and said the voice of a demon told him to harm her.
Calgary Herald
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
In Calgary courts: Convicted Coutts border protester can be released on bail pending appeal, judge rules
Convicted Coutts border protester Chris Carbert can be freed pending appeal, a Calgary judge ruled Monday. Article content Justice Jo'Anne Strekaf said despite concerns from the Parole Board of Canada that Carbert presents 'an undue risk to society' if granted parole, she found no serious concern exists. Article content Article content 'The applicant has demonstrated that there is no substantial likelihood that he will commit a criminal offence or interfere with the administration of justice if released from detection pending the hearing of his appeal,' Strekaf said in a written decision. Article content Article content Carbert has appealed his convictions by a Lethbridge jury of possession of weapons for a purpose dangerous to the public peace and mischief in connection with a border blockade in connection with a protest against COVID-19 restrictions and vaccine mandates. Article content Carbert was part of a group which blocked the border for two weeks in February, 2022. Article content Last Sept. 9, he was sentenced to the equivalent of a 6 1/2-year sentence, but with credit for remand time had two years, seven months and 21 days left to serve. Article content He was eligible for day parole on March 6, and full parole July 27, but was denied both on April 29. Article content Strekaf agreed with defence counsel Katherin Beyak that despite those decisions by the Parole Board her client should be released pending his two appeals. Article content Article content Although he was convicted of serious offences, the Alberta Court of Appeal judge agreed with Beyak there were legitimate grounds of appeal to be considered. Article content Carbert was found to be on possession of 'multiple firearms including a prohibited semi-automatic rifle, over-capacity magazines and thousands of rounds of ammunition,' while under a lifetime weapons prohibition, Strekaf noted. Article content 'In sentencing the applicant, the trial judge found that the applicant had armed himself with firearms, ammunition and body armour for the purpose of engaging with the police if he deemed it necessary to do so in the context of the Coutts border blockade.' Article content Strekaf said if kept in custody pending appeal, he may serve his entire sentence, without any remission, even if his appeal is successful. Article content She noted Carbert's conviction appeal hearing is set for Sept. 11, and if that decision is reserved by the court his sentence appeal, if necessary, may not be determined until after his full sentence is complete. Article content
Calgary Herald
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
Alberta Court of Appeal dismisses Grassy Mountain appeals made by Northback and Piikani, Stoney Nakoda Nations
Article content The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed Tuesday appeals made by an Australia-based mining company and two First Nations for a new hearing over a proposed coal mine along the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains. Article content Article content In 2021, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER), acting as part of a joint provincial-federal review panel, had turned down provincial approval for the Grassy Mountain project proposed by Benga Mining, now Northback Holdings. The federal government also rejected the proposal that year. Article content Article content Benga, Piikani Nation and Stoney Nakoda Nation challenged the AER decision, appealing both to the Alberta Court of Appeal as well as filing applications for a judicial review in the Court of King's Bench. Article content Article content Permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal was denied, and Justice Allison Kuntz turned down three separate judicial review applications made to the Court of King's Bench in December 2023. Article content Following an Oct. 8 hearing, Justices Jane Fagnan and Karan M. Shaner upheld the dismissal of the judicial review applications, with Chief Justice Ritu Khullar dissenting. Article content In their majority decision, the justices noted that Kuntz had pointed out that none of the judicial review applications challenged the constitutional validity of section 56 of the Responsible Energy Development Act (REDA), which prohibits judicial review. Article content Kuntz had dismissed the judicial review applications because they were barred by the REDA section. Article content Article content In upholding that 2023 ruling, the justices wrote that Northback and the two First Nations were essentially arguing that the section is 'ineffective for constitutional reasons.' Article content Article content 'The appellants did not provide timely notice of the constitutional issue raised before the chambers justice,' the justices concluded in Tuesday's ruling. Article content 'In the circumstances, the chambers justice did not err in determining that s 56 barred judicial review by the Court of King's Bench in this case.' Article content
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Calgary homeowner livid after city proposes bylaw change mid-fight
Evgeny Zhuromsky has lived in his home in the southwest community of Windsor Park for 10 years. Zhuromsky, pictured with his wife Elena Petrenko, is fighting a rowhouse development next door in court, and was frustrated to learn that the city released a development permit while he has a provincial appeal underway — and is proposing to change the bylaw altogether. (Karina Zapata/CBC - image credit) When Evgeny Zhuromsky won the right to appeal a major infill development next door, he thought he finally had a chance. He figured the company developing a nine-unit row house on his next-door neighbour's land would be forced to pause until he finally got his day in court. Now the rules could change. Calgary city council is being asked to vote Tuesday on a bylaw change that would allow homebuilders to proceed with a project even if it's before the Alberta Court of Appeal. And Zhuromsky feels it's desperately unfair. "Residents of Calgary … are penalized for not following or breaking bylaws, like, for example, if you over park or do not shovel your sidewalk on time," said Zhuromsky. ADVERTISEMENT "That's a double standard because they require you and me and all Calgarians to follow bylaws and they allow themselves not to." Construction has begun on the rowhouse development directly next door to Evgeny Zhuromsky's house. It will include five units and four secondary suites — unless Zhuromsky wins his appeal. (Karina Zapata/CBC) Zhuromsky lives in Windsor Park, one lot in from the corner. He lost his appeal to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board, then won the right to have his appeal heard at the provincial court. But the developer has already dug a hole and started laying the foundation for the row house next door after the city recently released the permit, despite Zhuromsky's appeal. These developments are happening across the city , one year after city council passed blanket rezoning last spring. They're mainly being built in inner-city neighbourhoods like Bowness, but they're starting to pop up in established communities farther from the city centre, too. Many are being appealed to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board, a quasi-judicial board that can revoke individual city permits. But that process can take months, and it's even longer if it's brought to court. And for developers, that means costly delays. ADVERTISEMENT That could change if council approves this move on Tuesday. But lawyers warn that will make it much more expensive and difficult for Calgarians who want to stop a development that affects them. Delays cost up to $500 a day The designer of the row house development, Designhaus Studio, declined to comment on behalf of its client, Best Investment Group, since the case is before the courts. The Calgary Inner City Builders Association, a group of more than 200 developers, didn't know about the proposed bylaw change. But chair Shameer Gaidhar has had concerns about the cost of appeals for a long time. Shameer Gaidhar is the president and CEO of Millenium Plus Homes. He's also the chair of the Calgary Inner City Builders Association. (Bryan Labby/CBC) He said the appeal process is important — Calgarians deserve that right. But it costs an average of $200 to $500 per day when a project sits empty, he said. "It costs money for the appellant, it costs money for the developer. In the end, there's a cost. That cost gets passed on to the end user. Let it be the renter, let it be the buyer. Whatever it is, someone has to pay for it. So we're eroding affordability," said Gaidhar. ADVERTISEMENT Gaidhar said he needs to learn more about the bylaw change before commenting on what it means for developers. Councillors, city decline to comment Ward 11 Coun. Kourtney Penner, whose ward includes Windsor Park, wouldn't comment on the situation because it's related to Zhuromsky's appeal before the courts. Coun. Sonya Sharp's ward is hot with development. Her team reached out to city administration to get clarity on the bylaw change, however they couldn't give an answer — but indicated all councillors would receive an update ahead of the public hearing. So the Ward 1 councillor declined to comment. The city also declined to comment on the particular part of the proposed bylaw change that would allow development permits to be released, even when a provincial appeal is underway. ADVERTISEMENT "The City of Calgary believes that Calgarians are an important part of building a great city. Throughout the planning process Calgarians can provide feedback and comments for consideration. More information on how Calgarians can get involved in the planning process can be found in the Community Involvement Toolkit. " 'A disastrous effect' Randi Collins, a Calgary lawyer whose specialty includes real estate, said as the land use bylaw stands today, the city can't release development permits while a provincial appeal is underway. But she said it's well within the city's right to change its bylaw. If it's approved, Collins said anyone who wants to stop a development from going ahead would have to go through another complicated and costly process: going to court and obtaining an injunction. "It is actually a disastrous effect, in my opinion," said Collins. "Essentially, the average person is going to have little recourse without expending large sums of money and navigating a very difficult legal system to do anything about it, which is concerning." An example of row housing in Calgary. These are popping up across Calgary when corner lots become available for redevelopment. (Robson Fletcher/CBC) Collins said it speaks to a larger issue. "Sometimes if the municipality is on board with a development, there's going to be little that you can do about it," she said. "Municipal governments actually have quite a lot of rights and a lot of power, and the court system does hesitate to intervene unless there's a clear abuse of that power. So it's unfortunate for the average person." Running out of time It's been a long, difficult and expensive process for Zhuromsky to fight his next-door development, and he feels like he's running out of time. The cost engineer in the oilpatch, who's lived in his home in Windsor Park for 10 years, is still waiting for a court date to be set so his appeal can be heard. Until then, all he can do is watch construction proceed. "[The developers] aren't doing anything that they're not supposed to be doing. It's the City of Calgary that … allowed them," said Zhuromsky. While he considered applying for an injunction, he just doesn't think it's practical. So he's hanging on to hope that he'll win the appeal. "I hope that if I win and they have to reapply, they will change the design so the structure that they are building now as we speak is per the municipal development plan, is complementary, sensitive and compatible with the rest of the community." In the meantime, he plans to attend the public hearing on Tuesday to ask city councillors to say no to the change.
CBC
05-05-2025
- Business
- CBC
Calgary homeowner livid after city proposes bylaw change mid-fight
Social Sharing When Evgeny Zhuromsky won the right to appeal a major infill development next door, he thought he finally had a chance. He figured the company developing a nine-unit row house on his next-door neighbour's land would be forced to pause until he finally got his day in court. Now the rules could change. Calgary city council is being asked to vote Tuesday on a bylaw change that would allow homebuilders to proceed with a project even if it's before the Alberta Court of Appeal. And Zhuromsky feels it's desperately unfair. "Residents of Calgary … are penalized for not following or breaking bylaws, like, for example, if you over park or do not shovel your sidewalk on time," said Zhuromsky. "That's a double standard because they require you and me and all Calgarians to follow bylaws and they allow themselves not to." Zhuromsky lives in Windsor Park, one lot in from the corner. He lost his appeal to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board, then won the right to have his appeal heard at the provincial court. But the developer has already dug a hole and started laying the foundation for the row house next door after the city recently released the permit, despite Zhuromsky's appeal. These developments are happening across the city, one year after city council passed blanket rezoning last spring. They're mainly being built in inner-city neighbourhoods like Bowness, but they're starting to pop up in established communities farther from the city centre, too. Many are being appealed to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board, a quasi-judicial board that can revoke individual city permits. But that process can take months, and it's even longer if it's brought to court. And for developers, that means costly delays. That could change if council approves this move on Tuesday. But lawyers warn that will make it much more expensive and difficult for Calgarians who want to stop a development that affects them. Delays cost up to $500 a day The designer of the row house development, Designhaus Studio, declined to comment on behalf of its client, Best Investment Group, since the case is before the courts. The Calgary Inner City Builders Association, a group of more than 200 developers, didn't know about the proposed bylaw change. But chair Shameer Gaidhar has had concerns about the cost of appeals for a long time. He said the appeal process is important — Calgarians deserve that right. But it costs an average of $200 to $500 per day when a project sits empty, he said. "It costs money for the appellant, it costs money for the developer. In the end, there's a cost. That cost gets passed on to the end user. Let it be the renter, let it be the buyer. Whatever it is, someone has to pay for it. So we're eroding affordability," said Gaidhar. Gaidhar said he needs to learn more about the bylaw change before commenting on what it means for developers. Councillors, city decline to comment Ward 11 Coun. Kourtney Penner, whose ward includes Windsor Park, wouldn't comment on the situation because it's related to Zhuromsky's appeal before the courts. Coun. Sonya Sharp's ward is hot with development. Her team reached out to city administration to get clarity on the bylaw change, however they couldn't give an answer — but indicated all councillors would receive an update ahead of the public hearing. So the Ward 1 councillor declined to comment. The city also declined to comment on the particular part of the proposed bylaw change that would allow development permits to be released, even when a provincial appeal is underway. "The City of Calgary believes that Calgarians are an important part of building a great city. Throughout the planning process Calgarians can provide feedback and comments for consideration. More information on how Calgarians can get involved in the planning process can be found in the Community Involvement Toolkit." 'A disastrous effect' Randi Collins, a Calgary lawyer whose specialty includes real estate, said as the land use bylaw stands today, the city can't release development permits while a provincial appeal is underway. But she said it's well within the city's right to change its bylaw. If it's approved, Collins said anyone who wants to stop a development from going ahead would have to go through another complicated and costly process: going to court and obtaining an injunction. "It is actually a disastrous effect, in my opinion," said Collins. "Essentially, the average person is going to have little recourse without expending large sums of money and navigating a very difficult legal system to do anything about it, which is concerning." Collins said it speaks to a larger issue. "Sometimes if the municipality is on board with a development, there's going to be little that you can do about it," she said. "Municipal governments actually have quite a lot of rights and a lot of power, and the court system does hesitate to intervene unless there's a clear abuse of that power. So it's unfortunate for the average person." Running out of time It's been a long, difficult and expensive process for Zhuromsky to fight his next-door development, and he feels like he's running out of time. The engineer, who's lived in his home in Windsor Park for 10 years, is still waiting for a court date to be set so his appeal can be heard. Until then, all he can do is watch construction proceed. "[The developers] aren't doing anything that they're not supposed to be doing. It's the City of Calgary that … allowed them," said Zhuromsky. While he considered applying for an injunction, he just doesn't think it's practical. So he's hanging on to hope that he'll win the appeal. "I hope that if I win and they have to reapply, they will change the design so the structure that they are building now as we speak is per the municipal development plan, is complementary, sensitive and compatible with the rest of the community." In the meantime, he plans to attend the public hearing on Tuesday to ask city councillors to say no to the change.
